Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

Section: 57 , 20

Law: Bankers Books Evidence Act, 1891

Section: 4

  Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----Art. 57 & S.20---Acknowledgment---Effect---Suit for recovery of loan- -Limitation----Liability was acknowledged in writing by defendants from time to time in their various letters, first of which was dated 23-10-1968 and the last was dated 22-4-1975---Suit filed on 27-4-1976 was thus, within time. Bankers' Books Evidence Act (XVIII of 1891)--- ----S.4----Statement of account---Admissibility---Statement of accounts filed by plaintiffs was admissible in evidence under S.4, Bankers' Books Evidence Act, 1891---Defendants having failed to rebut such evidence, statement of accounts riled by plaintiff was deemed to be correct---Suit was decreed on the basis of such statement of account. Sarwana for Plaintiff. Iftikharuddin for Defendant. Date of hearing: 14th November, 1990. JUDGMENT This is a suit for recovery of Rs.52,104.19. Plaintiffs M/s. Grindlays Bank Ltd. had in March, 1958 at their request granted banking facilities and accommodation by way of Overdraft upto the limit of Rs.40,000 to the Defendants in their current account. The Defendants as security hypothecated  their  stock-in-trade  with  the  Plaintiff  and   executed such letter on 27-3-1958. Thereafter, at the request of Defendants the limit of Overdraft was increased to Rs.1,50,000 and Supplemental Letter of Hypothecation was executed on 15-8-1960. As collateral security for the advances made, the six partners of the Defendant firm assigned to the plaintiff-Bank their respective Life Insurance Policies. The Defendants utilised the said facility and made part payments. As they could not clear the dues, therefore, the Plaintiffs after notice to the Defendants surrendered five Life Insurance Policies of the partners of Defendants' firm and collected in all Rs.39,925.58 and yet on 27-12-1975 a sum of Rs.52,104.19 was due to the Plaintiffs from the Defendant which has not been paid in spite of repeated demands. Hence the suit. The Defendants filed written statement wherein they admitted all the averments made in the plaint. They, however, averred that it was agreed by the Plaintiffs Bank that the amount recovered…